1. A cluster analysis exploration of prospective
teachers' perceptions of professional
learning communities (PLC)
presented by: Sally Wai-Yan WAN, EdD
Faculty of Education
The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Paper presented at BERA Annual Conference 2018, Northumbria University, Newcastle, UK September 13, 2018

2. Outline
Background of the study: Hong Kong Context
Literature review
Research method
Findings & discussion
Conclusion & implications

3. Hong Kong context
● Recent official educational documents: Emphasis on PLC as a key catalyst in
facilitating school improvement and curriculum development
○ ACTEQ (2003): “schools should be developed as professional learning communities, [while] teachers’
professional development should be regarded as an important force in school development” (p. 7)
○ ACTEQ (2003): “… NOT to be confused with the executive leadership of school administration. Rather,
it is the professional leadership by which a teacher builds up a collegial culture of professional learning
and sharing.” (p. 10)
○ CDC (2009): “Developing a learning community in the school, i.e. where teachers and students learn
together and from each other”
○ CDC (2014): “Every school is unique in terms of its strengths such as history, experiences in
curriculum development, pedagogy, teachers, leadership, community context, and the changes it
proposes to make each year.” (p. 1)
Develop “professional” leadership in support of the
establishment of PLC …
Background of the study

4. Professional learning communities (PLCs)
Key literatures: DuFour, 2004; Giles & Hargreaves, 2006; Stoll et al., 2006; Hord, 2009;
Vescio, Ross, & Adams, 2008
“a powerful, proven conceptual framework for transforming schools at all levels, …
[focusing] on learning rather than teaching, work collaboratively on matters related to
learning, and [holding] itself accountable for the kind of results that fuel continual
improvement.” (DuFour, 2011, p. 162).
often associated with in-depth, systematic, collaborative
professional development activities at schools (OECD, 2013)
Literature review

5. PLCs & teacher education
● Foundation for PLCs: Good preparation of teachers!
● Teacher education
○ Student teachers were able to develop the skills and commitment to teach through professional
collaboration inquiry within school and university partnerships. (Rigelman & Ruben, 2012)
○ Positive effects of a PLC on novice teachers, who had a strong sense about PLCs as a
collaborative effort and valued the opportunity to interact with teachers at other grade levels
(Martin, 2011)
○ Teacher educators should introduce the concept of teacher leadership in initial teacher
education [to] open up leadership opportunities for every preservice teacher, and prepare the
teachers with the necessary attitudes for leadership” by restructuring and reorganizing the
current teacher education programmes to enable prospective teachers (Cheng & Szeto, 2016, p.
147)
Clear expectations of teachers’ roles in PLCs
Applying teacher leadership skills in supporting PLC development

6. PLCs & teacher education
● HOWEVER ….
○ Rare studies explored prospective teachers’ readiness for becoming one
of the members in schools as professional learning communities.
○ How well current teacher education programmes have prepared
prospective teachers in committing themselves in implementing PLC is
not fully investigated.

7. Aim of the study
● To explore prospective teachers’ perceptions of
professional learning communities (PLC)

8. Research method
● Research questions:
○ RQ1. What are prospective teachers’ perceptions of
professional learning communities (PLC)?
○ RQ2. Is it possible to identify different patterns (profiles) in
prospective teachers’ perceptions of professional learning
communities (PLC)? If so, is there any relationship between
the patterns and teacher characteristics (gender, major
academic discipline and teaching practicum experience)?

9. Research method
Participants & settings:
● 5 different cohorts from the past three years (i.e. 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-
18) of prospective teachers who enrolled in a compulsory course in a local
university in Hong Kong
● N=167
Data collection:
● A survey concerning prospective teachers’ perceptions of PLC
● 27-item online survey, which was developed with reference to Bolam et al.
(2005), Olivier, Hipp, & Huffman (2003), and Angelle & Teague (2014)

10. Research method
Data analysis:
● Descriptive: mean, standard deviations, reliability analysis
● Inferential: Principal Component Analysis, cluster analysis, chi-square
analysis, ANOVA analysis, correlational analysis

11. Findings & discussion
○ RQ1. What are prospective teachers’ perceptions of
professional learning communities (PLC)?
○ RQ2. Is it possible to identify different patterns (profiles) in
prospective teachers’ perceptions of professional learning
communities (PLC)? If so, is there any relationship between
the patterns and teacher characteristics (gender, year of
study, major subject discipline and teaching practicum
experience)?

12. Component
1 2 3 4
Q01. Teachers should take collective responsibility for student learning. -.080 .597 .148 .271
Q02. Teachers should create conditions for students to feel the confidence to learn. .129 .649 -.038 .333
Q03. Teachers should set learning targets for individual students. .230 .690 .204 -.063
Q04. Teachers should ensure students receive constructive feedback about their work. .266 .624 .008 .259
Q05. Teachers should regularly monitor the learning and progress of individual students. .139 .644 -.087 .092
Q08. Teachers should have a variety of opportunities for collective learning through open dialogue. .209 .762 .239 .079
Q09. Teachers should learn together and apply the new knowledge to solve problems. .288 .627 .219 .126
Q10. Teachers should share with one another their evidence-based approach to improve practice. .663 .248 .166 .209
Q11. Teachers should share with one another how they actively seek and use feedback from students. .768 .228 .163 .242
Q12. Teachers should share with one another how they experiment and innovate in their teaching practice. .746 .119 .247 .290
Q13. Teachers should share with one another their reflections about their learning. .779 .117 .198 .032
Q14. Teachers should share with one another what they have learnt from the professional development
they attended/ experienced.
.808 .190 .085 .223
Q15. A collaborative process should exist for developing shared values among teachers. .554 .346 .359 .118
Q17. Teachers should share the school’s vision. .176 .100 .841 .100
Q18. Decisions should be made in alignment with the school’s vision and values. .180 .017 .841 .067
Q19. A collaborative process should exist for developing a shared vision among teachers. .189 .332 .688 .284
Q20. The school should implement policies and programmes that are aligned with the school’s vision. .302 .072 .700 .290
Q23. The school management team should incorporate advice from teachers in decision-making. .191 .130 .080 .812
Q24. The school management team should be proactive in addressing areas that need attention. .259 .311 .170 .685
Q25. The school management team should share responsibility and rewards for innovative efforts. .208 .149 .257 .709
Q26. The school management team should share power and authority with teachers. .147 .151 .124 .643
Table 1. Rotated Component Matrix.
RQ1. What are prospective teachers’ perceptions of professional
learning communities (PLC)?
RD SL SV SSL

13. Dimensions M S.D.
Dimension 1 Reflective dialogue (RD) 4.93 0.61
Dimension 2 Collective focus on
student learning (SL)
5.09 0.57
Dimension 3 Shared vision (SV) 4.63 0.68
Dimension 4 Shared and supported
leadership (SSL)
5.00 0.63
4 PLC dimensions Overall mean=4.93 (S.D.=0.49)
Positive towards the realization of PLCTable 2. PLC dimensions.

14. Overall RD SL SV SSL
Overall PLC -
Dimension 1 Reflective dialogue
(RD)
.845** -
Dimension 2 Collective focus on
student learning (SL)
.807** .534** -
Dimension 3 Shared vision (SV) .725** .540** .381** -
Dimension 4 Shared and supported
leadership (SSL)
.757** .537** .494** .466** -
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 2. Correlations amongst PLC dimensions.
Moderately strong relations:
RD & SL
RD & SV
RD & SSL
Importance of RD!

15. Sum of
Squares
df Mean Square F Sig.
Dimension 1 Reflective
dialogue
Between Groups 2.389 5 .478 1.288 .272
Within Groups 59.731 161 .371
Total 62.120 166
Dimension 2 Collective
focus on student learning
Between Groups 3.348 5 .670 2.123 .065
Within Groups 50.769 161 .315
Total 54.116 166
Dimension 3 Shared vision Between Groups 3.496 5 .699 1.532 .183
Within Groups 73.477 161 .456
Total 76.973 166
Dimension 4 Shared and
supported leadership
Between Groups 12.349 5 2.470 7.526 .000
Within Groups 52.835 161 .328
Total 65.184 166
Table 3. ANOVA (by major subject discipline).
Significant difference in Dimension 4 SSL & major subject discipline

16. N M S.D.
Dimension 1 Reflective dialogue CLED 65 4.81 0.65
ELED 43 5.02 0.56
BMED 21 4.87 0.64
LSED 23 5.00 0.49
SPE 11 5.18 0.70
Others 4 5.17 0.69
Total 167 4.93 0.61
Dimension 2 Collective focus on student learning CLED 65 4.98 0.48
ELED 43 5.27 0.48
BMED 21 5.16 0.45
LSED 23 4.93 0.87
SPE 11 5.06 0.72
Others 4 5.43 0.26
Total 167 5.09 0.57
Dimension 3 Shared vision CLED 65 4.56 0.63
ELED 43 4.69 0.72
BMED 21 4.44 0.55
LSED 23 4.70 0.74
SPE 11 5.07 0.62
Others 4 4.75 1.14
Total 167 4.63 0.68
Dimension 4 Shared and supported leadership CLED 65 4.80 0.55
ELED 43 5.41 0.51
BMED 21 4.79 0.61
LSED 23 4.82 0.69
SPE 11 5.27 0.59
Others 4 5.13 0.66
Total 167 5.00 0.63
Table 4. Comparison of according to major subject discipline. Nature of English? Open-mindedness? Collaboration?

17. Cluster 1
“Moderate PLC”
(N=93)
Cluster 2
“High PLC”
(N=74)
Dimension 1 Reflective dialogue 4.59 5.36
Dimension 2 Collective focus on student learning 4.80 5.44
Dimension 3 Shared vision 4.27 5.09
Dimension 4 Shared and supported leadership 4.60 5.49
Table 5. Final Cluster Centers.
RQ2a. Is it possible to identify different patterns (profiles) in
prospective teachers’ perceptions of professional learning
communities (PLC)?
Each dimension = >4.0

18. Cluster Error F Sig.
Mean
Square
df Mean
Square
df
Dimension 1 Reflective
dialogue
24.112 1 .230 165 104.673 .000
Dimension 2 Collective focus
on student learning
16.913 1 .225 165 75.011 .000
Dimension 3 Shared vision 28.284 1 .295 165 95.852 .000
Dimension 4 Shared and
supported leadership
32.032 1 .201 165 159.428 .000
Table 6. ANOVA (by cluster).

19. Demographic characteristics Cluster 1
“Moderate PLC”
(N=93)
Cluster 2
“High PLC”
(N=74)
Gender Male 31 27
Female 62 47
Major of study CLED 47 18
ELED 16 27
BMED 11 10
LSED 13 10
SPE 4 7
Others 2 2
Year of study Yr 2 1 1
Yr 3 15 9
Yr 4 60 50
Yr 5 17 14
Teaching practicum experience No 63 50
Yes 30 24
Table 7. Demographic information according to cluster membership.

20. RQ2b. If so, is there any relationship between the patterns and
teacher characteristics (gender, year of study, major subject
discipline and teaching practicum experience)?
● Chi-square tests to examine if any relationships with …
○ Gender
○ Year of study
○ Major subject discipline
○ Teaching practicum experience
● Significant difference: Major subject discipline !!!
● More ELED à High PLC vs More CLED à Moderate PLC
Chi-Square Tests
Value df
Asymptotic
Significance (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 15.043a
5 .010
Likelihood Ratio 15.354 5 .009
Linear-by-Linear Association 3.895 1 .048
N of Valid Cases 167
a. 3 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum
expected count is 1.77.

21. Conclusion & implications
PLC development
● Unbalanced understanding of PLC development?
○ Collective focus on student learning ßà Shared vision
Similar to other studies in school leadership ...
Realization of importance of student learning (Wan et al., 2018)
Hierarchical leadership in schools (Walker, 2004; Bryant, 2018)
… influenced by socio-cultural norms

22. Conclusion & implications
Developing understandings of PLC
Subject matters?
○ Influence of major subject discipline vs teacher engagement in PLC as
collective activities
Teaching English in HK
• Facing more challenges (Cheng & Wang,
2004)
• More opportunities in collaborative
works such as co-teaching in government-
initiated programmes (Carless, 2006)
English = openness, worldviews?
(Berns, 2007)

23. Conclusion & implications
PLC development
● Role of teacher education in preparing teachers in PLC
engagement?

24. Conclusion & implications
Research directions
Ø Interviews for in-depth understandings of “why”
Ø Design-based research in preparing prospective teachers for
developing PLC
Ø Longitudinal study about any changes after working at schools